Met up with my friend yesterday over dinner and had a nice chat with her before we went for our movie. Since the hottest topic in these past few weeks evolve around GE2006, I made a casual remark to her about the surprise I had when I found that most of my labmates are rather anti-PAP. To my surprise, she exclaimed that she thought I was one too. I was caught offguard. Scratching my head, I asked her why she thought so. In her view, self-opinionated people like me do not believe in PAP and would have found faults with their policies.
That simple remark set me thinking. In fact, it fell in line with a quote I saw on CNA. To my best recollection, George Yeo said,
" Generally voters can be categorized into two groups-
The first group is the English educated. They fell into either the above-middle to high income group. Patriotic people but are generally unhappy with PAP policies.
The second group is the Chinese educated, falling into the low to middle income group.....These people are the staunchest PAP supporters."
Are PAP supporters really portrayed as a group of yes-men? People without any opinions? If that is the case, perhaps it may explain why young voters who happen to fall in my age group, are more than willing to cast their votes in favor of the opposition.
"We need more opposition! I don't want all yes in the Parliament!"
"I will vote for the opposition! Regardless of WP, SDP, SDA! As long as it is opposition, I will vote for them!"
"PAP all one kind one!"
"PAP always sue the opposition and made them bankrupt.....that's worse than assassinating the opposition!"
The above comments were some of the many I have heard. I felt like rebutting each one but of course, politics is sensitive. Everyone has their own political ideologies. But to these people, I would like to encourage them to step out of Singapore.
Go to Cambodia, Vietnam or Myanmar. Give some thoughts on why these countries, given the abundance of human and natural resources, remain poor till today.
Or look at Indonesia. Why is the removal of fuel subsidies * destined to failure throughout the entire Megawatti period?
All these boiled down to a weak central government. As a result, what they have is a bureaucratic structure that is rampant with corruption and nepotism.
In Singapore, without natural resources and a large population, can we afford a weak central government when we first build our nation from scratch in 1965? SM Lee believes a strong government and no voices of opposition must be the way to set things going. And that we did. A nation built up from scratch in a span of 41 years. Of course times have changed now. High-handedness and oppression alone can no longer work. People want democracy and liberty in our political arena. This is a fact that PAP must recognize.
Who says Singaporeans are politically empathetic? They aren't. I support the presence of oppositions too. But only those of good calibre. I do not support oppositions for the sake of opposing. And no one can change my mind about this.
*Side note *
If you have been following that news, the fuel subsidies have always been a heavy burden to the Indonesian government and has led to many years of national income deficits.
1 comment:
Ah... My sentiments exactly. Which political party, other than the PAP, is capable of forming a working government? If citizens were blinded, led purely because of their disdain for PAP, and voted for the opposition simply because they are not PAP, then the country will go to ruins.
Nonetheless, we need stronger opposition, and a clearer picture of what each party stands for, not the wishy-washy scenario as is now.
We also need voters to be more discerning. To vote according to their conscience, and needs, not simply because that party is not PAP.
Post a Comment